| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 01:38:35 +0400 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> To: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: kernel/relay.c: a strange usage of delayed_work relay_switch_subbuf() does schedule_delayed_work(&buf->wake_readers, 1), wakeup_readers() only does wake_up_interruptible() and nothing more. Why can't we use a plain timer for this? In any case, this "wake_up ->read_wait after a minimal possible delay" looks somewhat strange to me, could you explain? just curious. Oleg. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists